authenticate

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Discloses browser opening, automatic token saving, scope hierarchy, and error behavior. Without annotations, this covers key behavioral traits well, though token persistence details could be added.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Concise with no wasted words; information is front-loaded. Slight structural improvement possible (e.g., separating flow and scope advice) but still highly efficient.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple auth tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers flow, scopes, error handling, and relative to siblings, it is fully complete.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The parameter 'scope' is fully covered by schema, and description adds valuable context: explains each scope meaning, hierarchy, and usage advice, exceeding schema info.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool logs in via browser, opens a login page, saves token, and explains scopes. It distinguishes from siblings by describing the OAuth flow vs. other auth tools.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly advises 'pick paper first' for safe defaults, and explains error handling (403 insufficient_scope). Provides clear when-to-use guidance.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.